Speaker 1: Lately.
Speaker 2: Welcome to the Late Debates.
Speaker 3: Good evening, everybody, and welcome to the not so Late Debate.
Speaker 3: I'm Liz Stor and joining me this evening is mister
Speaker 3: Joe Hildebrand and Gabriella Power.
Speaker 4: So you know you're in for a corker of a show.
Speaker 3: Later on, we'll discuss a group of Virginian teachers who
Speaker 3: have banded together to take their school to court for
Speaker 3: mandating using students preferred pronouns. Keir Starmer's government is again
Speaker 3: under fire for mauling the Equality Act, desegrating women's rights
Speaker 3: once again, and Reagan has launched another legal action. Seems
Speaker 3: like this woman can't even take a joke. But first tonight,
Speaker 3: with just thirty two days before Trump takes the White House,
Speaker 3: the Democrats are desperate to pass the hugest Omnimus Bill.
Speaker 3: You will not believe what is in these pages. But
Speaker 3: remember back in September when Speaker of the House Mike
Speaker 3: Johnson promised everyone this wasn't going to happen.
Speaker 2: But overall with the cr as our leader just noted,
Speaker 2: we have we have broken the Christmas omni and I
Speaker 2: have no intention of going back to that terrible tradition.
Speaker 2: So there won't be a Christmas omnibus. If somebody asked
Speaker 2: me in the hallway a little while ago, will there
Speaker 2: be mini buses? We don't want any buses. We're not
Speaker 2: going to do any buses, okay, And we got to
Speaker 2: get through this so everybody understands the necessity.
Speaker 5: It is not palatable.
Speaker 2: This is the sausage making part of legislation that nobody likes.
Speaker 2: But we're governing and we'll pick it up in January
Speaker 2: and start a brand new day for America.
Speaker 3: What a difference two months can make. That man can
Speaker 3: only afford to lose one vote otherwise lose the race
Speaker 3: for Speaker on January third, So he's all but a gana.
Speaker 3: But to give you an illustration of just how huge
Speaker 3: this omnibus bill.
Speaker 4: Is, he has Republican rip Nancy Mace.
Speaker 6: Okay, So we printed off the CR that dropped last night,
Speaker 6: and the last.
Speaker 4: CR that Congress did, and what didn't you do?
Speaker 6: The CR that was done in September went.
Speaker 4: From September twenty sixth to December twentieth eighty four, excuse me,
Speaker 4: eighty five days for this CR.
Speaker 5: It's twenty one pages.
Speaker 4: Now we have the next r that we're going to
Speaker 4: be voting on on the next day or two.
Speaker 7: It is fifteen hundred and forty seven pages.
Speaker 3: Who has time to read something that huge.
Speaker 4: Well, one guy did.
Speaker 3: His name's vivik Ramaswami, and as you know, he's someone
Speaker 3: that Trump has appointed to the Department of Government Efficiency.
Speaker 3: Here he is telling us a little bit about what's
Speaker 3: in this thing.
Speaker 7: Versus is about to pass a bill that blows away
Speaker 7: your tax pay money.
Speaker 1: But they made it over.
Speaker 7: Fifteen hundred pages long so you wouldn't read it. It
Speaker 7: contains pay raises for members of Congress and I'm not
Speaker 7: making this up an expansion of their federal health benefits.
Speaker 7: It contains all kinds of special interests and pork funding,
Speaker 7: including opening up a new stadium in Washington, DC. It
Speaker 7: renews the Global Engagement Center, which is a keynode of
Speaker 7: the censorship industrial complex. And the worst part is they
Speaker 7: didn't want you to know about any of it.
Speaker 3: This bill also blocks subpoenas of House data, which would
Speaker 3: make it impossible for Trump's doj to investigate Congress, namely
Speaker 3: the Gen six Committee. That would be impossible should this
Speaker 3: bill pass. It also funds twelve bio weapon labs.
Speaker 4: Why do we need those? Would love an explanation there.
Speaker 3: But it was all going quite swimmingly until one Elon
Speaker 3: mass took to Twitter with his over two hundred and
Speaker 3: seven million followers to alert the American public as to
Speaker 3: what was going on. He tweeted, any member of the
Speaker 3: House or Senate who votes for this outrageous spending bill
Speaker 3: deserves to be voted out in two years. Well, here's
Speaker 3: Fox News reporting on the resulting pandemonium.
Speaker 8: Here's what happened. A post on x by Elon Musk
Speaker 8: sent shockwaves through the Capitol House. Republicans were trying to
Speaker 8: see if they have enough votes to pass the spending
Speaker 8: bill in the next hour or two. Musk posted that
Speaker 8: anyone who votes hes should lose their office in two years.
Speaker 8: And lawmakers are scrambling tweets from Moscow.
Speaker 1: And has that complicated this?
Speaker 7: Well?
Speaker 1: I mean, I think that there's always a lot of
Speaker 1: interest in what's happening up here, and this is more
Speaker 1: than interest.
Speaker 8: They're telling people they vote, yes, they should be voted out.
Speaker 4: The social media world is a part of our politics.
Speaker 3: Yes, the social media We the ears party of politics. Now, Gabby,
Speaker 3: this is such an incredible feed. It really shows how
Speaker 3: much X is such a flex now everyday people. Elon's
Speaker 3: not an everyday person, but there was plenty of those
Speaker 3: also jumping online alerting the American public. Get on the line,
Speaker 3: call your member of parliament because this bill cannot pass.
Speaker 4: Just tell them you won't vote for them if they
Speaker 4: support it.
Speaker 9: It's amazing. It doesn't just show the power of Elon Musk.
Speaker 9: It shows the people in America and how engaged they are.
Speaker 9: And we really saw that in that election campaign. So
Speaker 9: many people were getting information on sources like X because
Speaker 9: they weren't getting it from the mainstream media, and people
Speaker 9: like Elon Musk and other digital creators like Dannie Johnston
Speaker 9: and Charlie Kirk were really engaging with American voters, and
Speaker 9: people were turning out to vote for the first time
Speaker 9: and throwing their support behind Donald Trump because that's who.
Speaker 5: They wanted in.
Speaker 9: But it's interesting people aren't just sitting back and waiting
Speaker 9: for January twenty when we do finally get Trump back
Speaker 9: in there, now calling up their representatives as Nacy Mace
Speaker 9: was encouraging them to do, and actually now having to
Speaker 9: say and how this is playing out. I think it's
Speaker 9: it's actually pretty amazing. And then but when you look
Speaker 9: at the spending that and the debt that America is in,
Speaker 9: it just highlights the need for those this government efficiency
Speaker 9: that pivic Ramislami and Musk will be leading.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we've got a cost of housing crisis over in
Speaker 3: America as well. And they're like, you want twelve bio labs,
Speaker 3: you want forty pay rises for everyone.
Speaker 1: Got to make COVID somewhere. You know, you can't just
Speaker 1: do it in your back yard.
Speaker 5: The violer, that's right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Look, I think I'm not sure how comfortable I
Speaker 1: am with Elon Musk just single handedly deciding.
Speaker 4: On making people aware.
Speaker 1: Ye's crazy true, and it is. It is a long
Speaker 1: time on American anided Australian tradition where if you've got
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of stuff, or even just one little
Speaker 1: thing that you know is going to be absolutely horrendously unpopular,
Speaker 1: we whack it. You attach it to a giant omnibus
Speaker 1: pillar and an a giant omnimus bill, or sometimes you
Speaker 1: can just attach it to a bill that's really really popular.
Speaker 1: So it's like this is the free Kittens for All bill,
Speaker 1: and then you just attach the sort of pay rise
Speaker 1: for parliamentarians on the bottom of it, and then of
Speaker 1: course you try to shove it through when everyone's looking
Speaker 1: to break for the holidays, everyone's looking to go home
Speaker 1: for Christmas, and you basically say, dude, don't you And
Speaker 1: this is what Anthony Alberanzi, of course, very successfully did
Speaker 1: in the last week of parliament. So Anthony Alberzi has
Speaker 1: managed to do what Joe Biden and the two US
Speaker 1: Houses of Congress have not been able to do and
Speaker 1: get all the including the course of social media bills,
Speaker 1: which very much upset Elon Musk, which may have been
Speaker 1: why he was a bit salty and posted that tweet
Speaker 1: in the first place.
Speaker 3: He has rightly said that this bill is a crime.
Speaker 3: He had many successive tweets after that first one alerting
Speaker 3: to the public what was actually going on in their
Speaker 3: House of Parliament. He kept saying, now now I've learned this,
Speaker 3: Now I've learned.
Speaker 4: That they're also pushing such and such.
Speaker 3: This bill is a crime. It cannot be allowed to continue.
Speaker 3: But you make a really good point there, Joe, because
Speaker 3: that's exactly what they've done. Because also in this omnibus
Speaker 3: bill is one hundred billion dollars for disaster relief, and
Speaker 3: we know that the communities that were affected by the hurry.
Speaker 1: To donate it to the Democrats presidential campaign.
Speaker 4: Yes, so they've really put.
Speaker 3: Members who represent those states between.
Speaker 4: A rock and a hard place.
Speaker 3: As is explained by Republican rep Anna paul Lina Luna, Sorry.
Speaker 4: We don't have that grab for you. She's basically saying, this.
Speaker 3: Thing is a sh I direct quote sandwich, because this
Speaker 3: is what they've done.
Speaker 1: That's what I'm doing. That's right. So you don't give us.
Speaker 1: If you don't give us the pay rise, you don't
Speaker 1: get your disaster relief funding. And that is the whole
Speaker 1: purpose of having an no be bill.
Speaker 4: That you know, absolutely diabolic.
Speaker 1: It is dastardly, It is diaboltic, but diabolical, and it
Speaker 1: is just it is politics. But again, I guess Trump
Speaker 1: and Alon are going to drain the swamp and the.
Speaker 4: Absolutely big plug. Trump and JD.
Speaker 3: Vans have put out a statement saying Republicans do not
Speaker 3: let this pass.
Speaker 4: Here's that Anna Paulina grab for you. The fact is
Speaker 4: is that, look, this is a sandwich.
Speaker 8: I don't know how to say that we're being forced
Speaker 8: into this position.
Speaker 4: They could have done a standalone.
Speaker 6: They did this because they knew that it would put
Speaker 6: members in this position to support it.
Speaker 5: We're damned if we do. We're damned if we don't.
Speaker 3: But of course the Democrats are all for it. Here's
Speaker 3: Democrat Dick Durbin told about the forty pay rise. He
Speaker 3: initially pretends he didn't even know about this bit, and
Speaker 3: then goes on to have a spat with the reporter
Speaker 3: about it.
Speaker 1: Members are giving themselves a pay raise? Do you guys
Speaker 1: deserve a pay raise?
Speaker 10: Well, that's news to me, it's good news. You know what,
Speaker 10: has it been ten years or fourteen years? No call?
Speaker 7: People look at the performance of kind and saying why
Speaker 7: should we give them more money?
Speaker 10: What about the media, Think about that for a second.
Speaker 1: We're not paid by public money.
Speaker 10: I know you're not, but I mean half of your listeners,
Speaker 10: who are there anymore? You're still getting the same paycheck.
Speaker 10: What's going on?
Speaker 4: If in doubt just starts sledging.
Speaker 3: The reporter, I mean talk about biting the hand that
Speaker 3: leads you, Gabby, Well, he.
Speaker 5: Does have a bit of a point with it.
Speaker 9: If he's covering talking to a CNN reporter, You mean
Speaker 9: you look at the coverage, there's election campaign. It seems
Speaker 9: pretty one sided. And you know, of course, don't look
Speaker 9: at me, to look at you.
Speaker 1: That's say that said the reporter. No problem.
Speaker 3: And the drone pandemonium in America has continued, but finally
Speaker 3: we have a word on it from the President of
Speaker 3: the United States.
Speaker 4: Nothing the furious apparently, but the checking it all out.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of drones.
Speaker 5: Authorized to pop down. I think you won't they all guys.
Speaker 1: Everybody's wanting to get in a deal.
Speaker 9: But we'll.
Speaker 3: Quote, after about a week of pandemonium, that was very compelling,
Speaker 3: rich and I'm sure everyone is one hundred reassured.
Speaker 4: Thank you, mister President.
Speaker 1: I think a grateful nation can sleep easy.
Speaker 3: Yes, absolutely, after seeing that grabs so reassured.
Speaker 9: It doesn't help Americans in any way. What American is
Speaker 9: watching that feeling reassured? And you know, and no one
Speaker 9: is better off with Biden leading at the moment. We've
Speaker 9: we've learnt that over the last four years he hasn't
Speaker 9: really been there. It's been his staff around him that
Speaker 9: have been making the decisions. But you know, at least
Speaker 9: when we heard from Donald Trump, at least he was
Speaker 9: confirming that the military knew where these drones were being
Speaker 9: launched from. Biden just said, oh, apparently there's nothing nefarious.
Speaker 9: It's just I can't even speaking. It's just litly.
Speaker 1: I can't tell you what it is or what's going on,
Speaker 1: but I can assure you it's completely safe.
Speaker 4: It's nothing to be worried about.
Speaker 1: Once so because Biden and the US governmental apparatus at
Speaker 1: large has been so utterly hopeless at discovering what is
Speaker 1: actually going on, Liz, and also they claim I have
Speaker 1: taken matters into my own hands and thought, well, you know,
Speaker 1: if no one else is doing their job, I'm going
Speaker 1: to roll up my slaves, I'll do it for you.
Speaker 1: And on my Groundbreak, my groundbreaking podcast, The Real Story
Speaker 1: with Joe Hildebrand, I thought, I'll get the real story
Speaker 1: on the drones, and I got an aviation expert who
Speaker 1: some of your viewers might know, Captain Byron Bailey. He
Speaker 1: sometimes comes on the show. He was very active in
Speaker 1: trying to pinpoint the location of m H three seventy.
Speaker 1: He's got some He sort of analyzed all the data
Speaker 1: and stuff and he wrote a book on it with
Speaker 1: the late great Ian Higgins of the Australian but he
Speaker 1: came on and he has a lot of high level
Speaker 1: contact sources in the US military and the US Air
Speaker 1: Force in particular, in one particular, a retired lieutenant colonel
Speaker 1: of the Air Force. He spoke to over night, and
Speaker 1: apparently what the military are all saying, Spill is that
Speaker 1: and this is amazing. Is the first time I've actually
Speaker 1: heard this, and it's perfectly plausible, perfectly rational. It explains everything.
Speaker 1: But it is that a while ago, a few years ago,
Speaker 1: I think we said that the late nineties or whenever
Speaker 1: it was, but a few years ago, NASA basically funded
Speaker 1: all these private companies, for the most part to come
Speaker 1: up with drone technology to see which would be the
Speaker 1: bear and this is the sort of thing it does
Speaker 1: all the time, which would be the best to meet
Speaker 1: America's civil and possibly also military, but largely civil needs.
Speaker 1: NASA is obviously a civilian organization because of course they're
Speaker 1: going to need huge amounts of these drones for what
Speaker 1: is going to be the industries of the future. So
Speaker 1: we already know, you know, your Amazon deliveries are all
Speaker 1: going to come by drones soon, Your Uber eats will
Speaker 1: all come by drone soon, and so warfare will be
Speaker 1: warfare pretty much already one hundred percent drives. But and
Speaker 1: you know, and back to the future, we're going to
Speaker 1: be flying around and we're going to have driverless cars
Speaker 1: and will soon have flying taxis as well, and driverless
Speaker 1: flying taxis like the Jetsons Star Wars. And so what
Speaker 1: they need to do is actually test all this new technology,
Speaker 1: test all these sort of prototypes and see if it works.
Speaker 1: And they actually set up they have set up sort
Speaker 1: of designated air traffic corridors highways if you like, in
Speaker 1: the northeast of America, which is the most populous part.
Speaker 1: So you're in New York's, New Jerseys, your Virginia, Virginia.
Speaker 4: They've all sights.
Speaker 1: Well apparently between New Jersey and Virginia that is one
Speaker 1: of that that is one of the highways and is
Speaker 1: below one thousand feet, which is the lowest that any
Speaker 1: light aircraft can go. So no light aircraft can go
Speaker 1: below that one thousand feet, and the drones operate there
Speaker 1: where there's not meant to be anything else.
Speaker 4: But if.
Speaker 3: Simply these guys establishing this corridor, getting their drones in
Speaker 3: the air testing things, why wouldn't the government just say.
Speaker 1: That because the government doesn't want Russia or China to
Speaker 1: know anything about what they're doing.
Speaker 3: I'm sure they know all about it now we are
Speaker 3: in a discussion.
Speaker 1: I don't want them to know because this is such sense.
Speaker 3: So you've just told Russia and China good ones.
Speaker 1: Because it is so cutting edge, they'll just see that
Speaker 1: and think it's Iranian aliens or whatever. But it is
Speaker 1: so cutting edge technology, it is so sensitive, and obviously
Speaker 1: industrial espionage is a huge thing. We know that China
Speaker 1: crawls all over whatever technological secrets they can get their
Speaker 1: hands on, and this of course explains why, as many
Speaker 1: experts have said, every single one of these drones have
Speaker 1: been cited has official FAA regulated flying lights on the
Speaker 1: red light on one side and the little flashing one
Speaker 1: as well, so they're all aboid by US Federal Aviation
Speaker 1: Authority rules, which of course, if there were any foreign force,
Speaker 1: be it from another country or another planet, they would
Speaker 1: not be doing. So this is the only theory that
Speaker 1: to me makes perfect sense.
Speaker 4: And we'll make sure that in.
Speaker 9: New Jersey is listening to your podcast, and many people
Speaker 9: are quite concerned.
Speaker 5: Were hardly going.
Speaker 1: The real sports solved the problem?
Speaker 3: I think that could very much be true because it
Speaker 3: also works in with the theory circulating that this has
Speaker 3: got a lot to do with the fact that the
Speaker 3: FAA's Reauthorization Act back in twenty eighteen is due to
Speaker 3: expire in December twentieth, and so the next administration will
Speaker 3: be looking to make a different bill furthering those powers,
Speaker 3: and everyone's like, oh, it's going to be another grab
Speaker 3: for our freedoms.
Speaker 4: Only time will tell.
Speaker 3: But we all know that America has struggled for a
Speaker 3: very long time within ob city pandemic. It is well
Speaker 3: known throughout the Western world that they are the leaders,
Speaker 3: although Australia is embarrassingly playing catch up. According to CDC data,
Speaker 3: more than one in five Americans are obese. According to
Speaker 3: the same data in twenty three states, it's more like
Speaker 3: one in three RB. So what does the San Francisco
Speaker 3: Health Department decide to do? Hire a fat positivity expert
Speaker 3: to consult on weight stigma and neutrality. Her name is
Speaker 3: Virgie Tovar, and here she is weighing in on what health.
Speaker 4: Means to her.
Speaker 1: Where do you see the intersection?
Speaker 4: Really, what is your definition of health?
Speaker 6: Yeah, that's really complicated. I think I want to sort
Speaker 6: of I want to talk about that question, but I
Speaker 6: want to start by saying that, you know, no one
Speaker 6: has to be healthy, you know, right, Like I mean,
Speaker 6: it's like no, like, there is no government body that's
Speaker 6: like out there putting you know what I mean, No
Speaker 6: one owes anybody that in either the traditional sense of
Speaker 6: the word or any other more innovative or you know,
Speaker 6: more politicized maybe even version of that word. So I
Speaker 6: think it's important to say like, and I want to
Speaker 6: back up and bring an intersectionality and say like, great, like,
Speaker 6: look at the disabled community, right, like, I think people
Speaker 6: with disabilities have an activist within that space have consistently
Speaker 6: been saying like, I'm never going to be your notion
Speaker 6: of healthy.
Speaker 5: That doesn't mean I don't get to be a full human.
Speaker 6: You get to treat me some kind of way, right,
Speaker 6: And so I think that I love taking that principle
Speaker 6: within disability rights to fat activism and to understanding of fatness.
Speaker 3: Except that being fat is not a disability. And I'm
Speaker 3: sure the people living with a disability would be the
Speaker 3: first to say so, how jolly insulting.
Speaker 4: This woman has.
Speaker 3: Authored a book called You Have the Right.
Speaker 4: To Remain Fat.
Speaker 3: I mean, why does San Francisco Health Department get off
Speaker 3: gabby when this is the second biggest killer, second only
Speaker 3: just smoking in the United States.
Speaker 9: No longer needs encouragement to eat junk food or get
Speaker 9: fat because everyone loves it. Like if I'm doing a
Speaker 9: trip to America, I'm going to shake shack. I'm going
Speaker 9: to all the places.
Speaker 5: And living it up.
Speaker 9: But the thing is, we could laugh about it, but
Speaker 9: it's a serious health problem in America. Seventy million Americans
Speaker 9: are OBEs. And then you know, the life expectancy over
Speaker 9: in the US is nowhere near commit to other developed nations,
Speaker 9: and it's a huge concern. Of course, if you're going
Speaker 9: to the doctor and the doctor's saying this is actually
Speaker 9: a huge problem. Now you're now at risk of having
Speaker 9: a heart attack, you're at risk.
Speaker 4: Of cardio vascular disease, any number of.
Speaker 9: Liver disease, and risk of types of cancers developing. But
Speaker 9: then you've got this person that sand Franz hired saying,
Speaker 9: you know, ignore the medical advice, We've got to stay fat.
Speaker 9: It's absolutely ridiculous. I think san Franz got enough problems
Speaker 9: as it is.
Speaker 5: I could really be focusing on the on the.
Speaker 1: Issue I don't think there's a huge obesity problem among
Speaker 1: San Francisco's homelessness epidemic, for example, struggling. But it's just
Speaker 1: such a San Francisco story, isn't it. It's just absolutely amazing.
Speaker 4: Negligent though, don't you think?
Speaker 1: Well, I think the problem is. I think that it
Speaker 1: confuses two things.
Speaker 8: Now.
Speaker 1: I'm the last person to ever want a fat shame anyone.
Speaker 1: I've got plenty of vices. I'm just lucky that wait
Speaker 1: as is something I've never had to struggle with. But
Speaker 1: I've got it. This is true.
Speaker 3: Joe lives on AFC and Hungry Jacks. I kid you,
Speaker 3: not every single night two piece Fox Tonight metabolically blessed.
Speaker 1: I know I can't help it. I've got a very
Speaker 1: fast metabolism and it just raised through it. But I'm like,
Speaker 1: I'm addicted to a whole bunch of other stuff, pretty
Speaker 1: much everything else except food.
Speaker 3: I've been Would you be encouraging people who are clinically
Speaker 3: or lot of me to stay that way?
Speaker 1: And it's great, That's exact point I was going. Mate.
Speaker 1: So I used to smoke right before I managed to
Speaker 1: quit by vaping. But you know, and I'd smoke and
Speaker 1: I hated people who are shamed smokers, and I found
Speaker 1: it really annoying that, you know, we've got completely sort
Speaker 1: of marginalized and soon could that help you quit? Though
Speaker 1: exactly think I think it did it, but also shame.
Speaker 1: But also the main thing that made me quit is
Speaker 1: because I became a father and I realized that I
Speaker 1: was going to die much sooner than I actually needed to,
Speaker 1: and they wouldn't be able to run around after my
Speaker 1: kids without getting out of breath and sort of stuff.
Speaker 1: And I and I, you know, even then it was
Speaker 1: really really hard, and it was only through vaping that
Speaker 1: I could. But the point being is it's one thing
Speaker 1: to say, you know, we all have our vices and
Speaker 1: we shouldn't shame other people and you know, forced to live.
Speaker 1: It's a very different thing to say, oh, no, smoking
Speaker 1: is great. I should be proud to be a smoker.
Speaker 1: I should be proud to be killing myself a decade
Speaker 1: earlier than I need to be so my kids wouldn't
Speaker 1: have a father when they were.
Speaker 9: Campaign and taxpayers have to pay for this, So someone
Speaker 9: gets a job encouraging people.
Speaker 3: To the taxpayer who picks up the disease burden. The
Speaker 3: price tag on the disease burden that OBEs people do
Speaker 3: put on the rest of the taxpayers in whatever country
Speaker 3: they're living. Into the UK now where Labour's London Led
Speaker 3: Council has come under fire for advertising in several languages
Speaker 3: to any migrants.
Speaker 4: Who might be out there in search of social housing.
Speaker 3: Their video was playing in Arabic, French, Spanish, ben Gali,
Speaker 3: with Westminster residents saying, hang on a minute, we're priced
Speaker 3: out of our own city.
Speaker 4: Here do us a favor.
Speaker 3: And here you are supposedly advertising heavily subsidized housing to migrants.
Speaker 3: We can barely afford tolive here ourselves, and you.
Speaker 4: Guys give them.
Speaker 3: It's a thirty one thousand pounds subsidy every year to
Speaker 3: live where we live, but at a fraction of the cost.
Speaker 3: And you're advertising to people who supposedly haven't even gone
Speaker 3: to the effort of learning English. Gabby, you can imagine
Speaker 3: how angry the residents of we Sminster are infuriating.
Speaker 9: It's so infuriating, you know people over you know, right
Speaker 9: around the world, but particularly in places like England and
Speaker 9: in London where working middle class are paying, you.
Speaker 5: Know, living paycheck to paycheck.
Speaker 9: They're trying so hard to save up for a house
Speaker 9: and they can't because it rents through the roof, and
Speaker 9: then they're paying for social housing, and the priority seems
Speaker 9: to go to migrants that can't even speak English. You know,
Speaker 9: I think there needs to be some incentive for them
Speaker 9: to be able to learn English, for them to.
Speaker 5: Be able to contribute to society.
Speaker 9: Absolutely, and I do have sympathy with people who are
Speaker 9: in vulnerable situations, but this is the priority should be
Speaker 9: for the.
Speaker 5: People of England.
Speaker 9: And you know, I think seeing that it's hard and
Speaker 9: as you say, Joe, the fact that French.
Speaker 1: Look, I was going to say, I was going to
Speaker 1: go into bat for this scheme, say, I didn't see
Speaker 1: any problem with soever. You need to be able to
Speaker 1: communicate with people in a way they can understand, and
Speaker 1: if that means using their native language. And then I
Speaker 1: saw they're using French, they're doing it for the French.
Speaker 1: The French don't really the French. The French had their
Speaker 1: own empire and they pissed it away because they couldn't
Speaker 1: sail boats properly. And as for your revolution, liberty, equality, fraternity,
Speaker 1: tell that to the Haitians. The French revolutionary government tried
Speaker 1: to re enslave the Haitians after they'd fought for their freedom,
Speaker 1: so that Napoleon could use all the sugar as fodder
Speaker 1: for his hopelessly incompetent sailing machines.
Speaker 3: May have you done a podcast on how much you
Speaker 3: hate the French, because I think.
Speaker 1: Series something that infuses mind. Taiwan into China, the Vietnam
Speaker 1: War to anything, French dragged everyone else in it to
Speaker 1: try and clean up their mess. Just hopeless. World War
Speaker 1: two come in, we have it now, regime that degrees
Speaker 1: with everything you say.
Speaker 3: Well, also the French, according to Joe, you can trace
Speaker 3: it back to the French.
Speaker 4: Just jokes, that's not actually true whatsoever.
Speaker 3: But staying in the u UK, Britain has emerged as
Speaker 3: the western capital of sharia law after it came to
Speaker 3: light that over eighty five sharia law courts are operating
Speaker 3: throughout the UK. I'm sure that this comes as a
Speaker 3: shock to most Brits that there is that many. The
Speaker 3: first one was established back in nineteen eighty two, and gosh,
Speaker 3: haven't they grown to twenty twenty four. This raises a
Speaker 3: lot of questions, Joe, because there's it begs the question obviously, yes,
Speaker 3: plenty of migrants here, same in Australia. But to what
Speaker 3: extent do you allow people who have come to your
Speaker 3: country and should be operating by your laws to set
Speaker 3: up their own quothy law courts and call their own shots. Particularly,
Speaker 3: this raises questions with regards to women's rights in the UK.
Speaker 4: The article goes on to.
Speaker 3: Detail which I particularly found interesting, that if if a
Speaker 3: Muslim man wants to be divorced, he simply needs to
Speaker 3: say divorced three times and he's done, whereas.
Speaker 1: My text message is actually I to just text I
Speaker 1: divorced you three times? Oh God, and that was enough.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you'd be living on tenterhooks as a Muslim wife.
Speaker 4: I mean, any minute.
Speaker 1: You find obedient and it's all over.
Speaker 3: But of course a woman has to apply to one
Speaker 3: of these Sharia law courts and have it approved. So
Speaker 3: that is just one example of the inequality this puts
Speaker 3: on women, particularly living in a country where they ought
Speaker 3: to have equal rights.
Speaker 1: That's right, And look, the truth is I do have
Speaker 1: legal rights because the actual law of the land would
Speaker 1: override Trea law wherever there's a clash. But of course
Speaker 1: whether or not the parties themselves and women, for example,
Speaker 1: empowered to access those laws or want to, or whether
Speaker 1: they're worried that there would be repercussions if they did that.
Speaker 1: So I think I don't think it's really a legal
Speaker 1: problem so much as a social problem. And again, I
Speaker 1: think a lot of people hear Sharia law and they
Speaker 1: think it's people being stoned to death for adultery or
Speaker 1: you know, crazy kind of wild punishments. It is mostly
Speaker 1: for things like marriages. And so in that case, it's
Speaker 1: not that much different from getting married in a Catholic
Speaker 1: church and obeying the vows that the church puts upon you,
Speaker 1: which are not legally obliged to do, and which.
Speaker 3: But at least would sure and then you are married
Speaker 3: in the eyes of the state. Whereas in this situation,
Speaker 3: apparently over one hundred thousand marriages have occurred in these
Speaker 3: Sharia law courts, Gabby, but England has absolutely no clue.
Speaker 5: They're not official marriages.
Speaker 9: No, it's concerning when you look at what there are
Speaker 9: one hundred thousand Islamic marriages that have been conducted and written,
Speaker 9: many of them not registered. And you know the fact
Speaker 9: that there have been so many of these Sharia law
Speaker 9: courts opening up throughout the UK.
Speaker 5: I think creates a big social problem.
Speaker 9: When you look at Sharia law, there are apparently, you know,
Speaker 9: as you say, big problems for women. There can apparently
Speaker 9: marry as many women as they like, and then you know,
Speaker 9: for women it's a different story.
Speaker 5: And they're apparently also apps that are.
Speaker 9: Being set up that men can use so you can
Speaker 9: to work out their inheritance, so daughters can get fifty
Speaker 9: percent less compared to sons, all these types of things.
Speaker 9: So this is all happening in Britain, but it's not
Speaker 9: under British law. But it creates a social problem because
Speaker 9: this is if this keeps happening, this keeps growing, it's
Speaker 9: going to create a divide in Britain, that's right.
Speaker 1: I think the problem is that they're that there, that
Speaker 1: there are these cultures or these social issues which are
Speaker 1: overwhelmingly weighted against women. I remember I went to Morocco once,
Speaker 1: which has also has technical bigamy laws as well. You
Speaker 1: can have two wives, but very few people take it up.
Speaker 1: And one of the one of the guys I spoke
Speaker 1: to there said.
Speaker 3: Do you really want to?
Speaker 1: Because I want to. But I think the problem is
Speaker 1: that that where it exists is not that the tech
Speaker 1: quarly there's this other law there, because that again, that
Speaker 1: law can be completely overridden by the by the actual
Speaker 1: law of the land.
Speaker 3: The question, sure, but we do or not that these
Speaker 3: women are likely to be aware of the law of
Speaker 3: the land, which.
Speaker 1: Is whether or not women are But that's right. The
Speaker 1: question is whether or not women are actually being oppressed,
Speaker 1: whether or not they're being beaten. I mean, there's there's
Speaker 1: some weird things in certain Muslim I think that's had.
Speaker 1: It's about, you know, whether you know that you should
Speaker 1: only likely beat your woman with a stick if she's bad.
Speaker 1: But it does stress very lightly, so it's very progressive.
Speaker 1: So I think that is more of a problem rather
Speaker 1: than you know, the fact that Sharia law is in
Speaker 1: the land. That is just a sort of cultural thing
Speaker 1: more than it is any anything that provides any legal protection.
Speaker 3: But therein lies the question to what extent do you
Speaker 3: allow a different culture to practice in a country which
Speaker 3: has an entirely different culture to Sydney Now where Termine
Speaker 3: wearing Sikhs, so pushing for religious exemptions to wear a
Speaker 3: helmet if they're on a motorcycle. They say, look, this
Speaker 3: is not just a piece of material. For us, this
Speaker 3: is part of our religion. In order to wear a
Speaker 3: helmet as per the law of the land, we can't
Speaker 3: really do that wearing our turban. Maveleen Deer, who's founder
Speaker 3: of the Singh's Social The Sings, Yes, sorry, I thought
Speaker 3: I'd mispronounced seats. The Sings Social Motorcycle Club Australia in Sydney,
Speaker 3: says it is an infringement on religious rights. The turban
Speaker 3: is not just headwear. It is a religious symbol embodying
Speaker 3: our commitment to truth. The choice we have is to
Speaker 3: either take off our turbans or not right at all.
Speaker 3: It's not just a piece of cloth for us. So
Speaker 3: different example, Gabby, but here we have the same thing.
Speaker 3: There's a particular religious group from a particular culture saying,
Speaker 3: hang on a minute, we don't want to abide by
Speaker 3: the laws of the land, even though it's in this
Speaker 3: case of health and safety, because we are from a
Speaker 3: different culture and that means we get to wear our
Speaker 3: turbans at all times.
Speaker 9: Look good luck for them, you know, good luck to them,
Speaker 9: I should say for trying.
Speaker 5: But there's no case here. You make exemption for one.
Speaker 9: If you're going to make exemptions for the next of
Speaker 9: the next And it comes down to safety, as you said,
Speaker 9: And if you actually look at the stats, I think
Speaker 9: injuries and deaths from motorcycle incidents have just gone up.
Speaker 9: They think they're thirty three percent compared to this time
Speaker 9: last year.
Speaker 5: There's there's no case for it.
Speaker 1: Have they gone up among seats? Maybe they're very safe.
Speaker 3: Do you think the men's government will bow to this
Speaker 3: commanding this as there.
Speaker 1: Was a thing as long as there was some kind
Speaker 1: of helmet exemption form or whatever. And I'm serious here
Speaker 1: that you would fill in and say I hereby except
Speaker 1: that I'm an increased risk of head injury or whatever,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to I'm not going to hold the
Speaker 1: state libel or other people liabel for any head injuries
Speaker 1: I incurve as a result of this. Blah blah blah.
Speaker 9: Anyone you still apply it to.
Speaker 4: Anyone should have the right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, if you want to wear a turban every single
Speaker 1: day of your life, that's absolutely fair.
Speaker 4: But for any other reason, Yeah.
Speaker 1: But that is a very specific reason that if there's
Speaker 1: someone else who's religion physically prevents them from putting on
Speaker 1: a motorcycle helmet, then yeah, I mean I don't think.
Speaker 9: What about someone who just wants to get out of
Speaker 9: the fine if they're caught, you know, on a motorbike.
Speaker 1: They're not wearing the fine, but that would happen. Do
Speaker 1: you know how much I don't know, if you know
Speaker 1: guys know anythings. Do you know how much effort it
Speaker 1: takes to crazy? So you're not allowed to you're not
Speaker 1: you're not allowed to cut your hair. You're allowed to
Speaker 1: cut any of your hair. It's all sacred, right, And
Speaker 1: then you have to wrap your hair up, and then
Speaker 1: you have to wrap it them and I don't know
Speaker 1: how they do it, but they've got this really particular
Speaker 1: way of tying it. It takes ages. You have to you
Speaker 1: cannot take it off, you cannot be out and about
Speaker 1: without it. Right, So again, to do the same, that's right.
Speaker 1: So again, if someone says if someone's caught, like if
Speaker 1: someone's caught fine for not wearing a helmet and they
Speaker 1: just happened to have a turban to get away from
Speaker 1: the inconvenience of putting on a helmet, that just makes
Speaker 1: no sense whatsoever.
Speaker 3: But also, how have they been surviving to date? Obviously
Speaker 3: they have been abiding by the law of the land.
Speaker 4: So whatever you've.
Speaker 1: Been doing the helmets, so just be wearing the turbines.
Speaker 4: No, I don't believe.
Speaker 3: So that's why they're applying for the exemption to say,
Speaker 3: can we stop doing this?
Speaker 4: We will let you know what the Men's government decides
Speaker 4: before we go to a break pill testing.
Speaker 3: This time it's in place in New South Wales. How
Speaker 3: many times have we had this debate? Here's Premier Men's
Speaker 3: today with his little bit on why he said this
Speaker 3: is okay. I was a skeptic going into it, but
Speaker 3: ultimately we all need to be led by the evidence.
Speaker 3: So we're now paying health officials to make it safer
Speaker 3: for people to take drugs. Gabby I have always said
Speaker 3: just let it happen. Like if you remove the risk factor,
Speaker 3: the evidence is more people are going to take drugs
Speaker 3: because they lose their inhibition.
Speaker 11: Yeah.
Speaker 9: What message does it saying, hey, kids, don't take drugs,
Speaker 9: but if you do, if you go to this festival,
Speaker 9: we just test it, you'll be fine. I think it's
Speaker 9: so irresponsible. I don't agree with it at all. I
Speaker 9: think it sends a wrong message to the next generation
Speaker 9: and also could create a bit of a culture problem.
Speaker 5: Places like Sydney.
Speaker 9: Already has a problem with drugs.
Speaker 5: Party drugs are already a big issue.
Speaker 9: It creates so many problems in families or long term impacts.
Speaker 9: People can get dependent on these drugs that all of
Speaker 9: a sudden going to festivals and then parties and it
Speaker 9: Someone else has made this point today, but it creates
Speaker 9: this false sense of safety and who really benefits what
Speaker 9: drug dealers and criminal gangs are going to make more
Speaker 9: money from.
Speaker 4: This great point.
Speaker 1: I just feel like this is just the most millennial
Speaker 1: thing ever. It's like, you know, I want to take
Speaker 1: illegal drugs, but I want the government to make sure
Speaker 1: that I'm protected when I do so. It's like I
Speaker 1: used to take hates the drugs when I was a
Speaker 1: wayard in wild youth, and I knew I took the risks.
Speaker 1: I didn't ask anyone if it was safe, and half
Speaker 1: the time I did get into all sorts of trouble.
Speaker 1: So but again, I just don't like, if you're going
Speaker 1: to be a rebellious youth, surely you don't want big
Speaker 1: brother to be holding your hand while you do. I
Speaker 1: just don't get it, Like it's just so unrock and roll.
Speaker 1: It's just like, so.
Speaker 9: I'll just get them I'll give it.
Speaker 1: But it's kind of like it is anxiously you're that
Speaker 1: anxious about from drugs.
Speaker 9: Talking to their friends saying, oh no, it's actually okay.
Speaker 9: You just get it tested, and then you know if
Speaker 9: someone was never going to take it in the first place,
Speaker 9: and all of a sudden there's more and more.
Speaker 5: Normalizes it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, what's the use of having illicit substances when you
Speaker 3: can take it.
Speaker 4: To the state? All the.
Speaker 5: War on drugs here, honestly.
Speaker 3: Indeed, and it is the taxpayer that ends up picking
Speaker 3: up the tab. If that person it's an addiction, if
Speaker 3: they find that they're homeless.
Speaker 4: Down the track, right.
Speaker 9: People start taking these drugs and then people it can
Speaker 9: lead to. It's one bad decision after another bad decision.
Speaker 9: It's a flow on effects. People make big life choices,
Speaker 9: and they may end up in a situation which they
Speaker 9: thought that they would have never.
Speaker 5: Been in it. And it all starts from somewhere.
Speaker 1: I think, yeah, well, I think most people who are
Speaker 1: going to take drugs are going to take them anyway.
Speaker 1: I don't think this'sill Necessarily.
Speaker 4: It's not true.
Speaker 3: I think if you're a teenager and you're going to
Speaker 3: say a music festival where these pill testings are concentrated.
Speaker 4: You might be tempted.
Speaker 3: Look, it's a big night, let's just give it a go,
Speaker 3: and hey, it's been tested.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I mean, I don't think it's I mean,
Speaker 1: ecstasy is not particularly addictive compared to some of the
Speaker 1: other really nasty drugs, like your heroin, your crystal meth,
Speaker 1: and indeed the party drug coke, which everyone thinks is
Speaker 1: fine because there's some suburbsset do it. But but I
Speaker 1: think it's more likely to be there's more likely to
Speaker 1: be these weird repercussions that we only see sort of
Speaker 1: much later on. Firstly, do do drug dealers at festivals
Speaker 1: end up just frequenting the lines for pills to get tested,
Speaker 1: knowing that there will be a sort of police moratorium
Speaker 1: on arrests, because obviously police can't arrest people for holding drugs.
Speaker 3: If they won't necessarily be there, the kids will get
Speaker 3: their hands on them. In knowing that the festivals coming up.
Speaker 1: Drug dealers operate at the festivals as everywhere plenty of
Speaker 1: the do, I can assure you, so they would be
Speaker 1: selling pills, and of course you sell them for much
Speaker 1: much more, and you've got a much much more captive
Speaker 1: and desperate market because kids are struggling to sort of
Speaker 1: catch up or they haven't been able to get it,
Speaker 1: so that can be dangerous. They don't know what they're getting.
Speaker 1: So do the dealers a operate with impunity in the
Speaker 1: sort of testing precinct? Do they be test their own
Speaker 1: pills and say these have been tested and in fact,
Speaker 1: perversely enough, use that as a kind of you know,
Speaker 1: means of platform on which to sell drugs and say
Speaker 1: these have been tested and they're pure, and they're pure
Speaker 1: MDMA whatever. See. Of course, what happens when kids get
Speaker 1: appeal given back to them and they say, yes it's pure,
Speaker 1: or yes, we don't advise you to take it, of
Speaker 1: course disclaim and disclaimed disclaimer, but this doesn't have any
Speaker 1: toxic sizes or whatever. Whatever the kid takes it. Something
Speaker 1: does go wrong. Is the government, I.
Speaker 4: Cannot believe coming up next, kissed Armer.
Speaker 3: His government's under fire again for mauling their own equality acts.
Speaker 3: Will be back, Welcome back, well Reagan, the woman we
Speaker 3: just can't see the back of has now taken a
Speaker 3: second legal action.
Speaker 4: And what does it mean a week?
Speaker 1: I think when you say just can't see the back
Speaker 1: of you mean, just can't get enough of because this
Speaker 1: chick is going gangbusters. She is just off the reservation.
Speaker 1: I was going to say off meds, but she might
Speaker 1: actually have. I mean, honestly, I've said it before.
Speaker 4: Careful Jo proving very litigious.
Speaker 1: You want to mind all I wanted. All I want
Speaker 1: you to know, Rachel, is that I am concerned for you.
Speaker 1: I have your well being very very close to my heart.
Speaker 1: So Raygan, Rachel Gunn has demanded ten thousand dollars from
Speaker 1: this comedy club that was going to put on this tiny, little,
Speaker 1: low key musical about her, so low key that the
Speaker 1: total in ticket sales that these guys had actually managed
Speaker 1: from a show that never went ahead, a total for
Speaker 1: all their ticket sales combined was five hundred dollars. So
Speaker 1: tiny little independent comedy club in Darlinghurst. And I tell
Speaker 1: you why I lived in Darlinghurst for years. Rent is
Speaker 1: not cheap, right, And she has sent using a law
Speaker 1: firm from Glebe as well, So it's very much your
Speaker 1: tale of Inner Sydney, aust that's right, tale of innsed
Speaker 1: versus in a West. But anyway, so she has sent
Speaker 1: a demand's letter to the club's owner for a show
Speaker 1: that did not take place and which had only made
Speaker 1: five hundred dollars at the box office. And the client says,
Speaker 1: you will. The lawyers say, in respective, Raygun, you will
Speaker 1: reimburse our client with legal costs to date, which we
Speaker 1: estimate to be ten thousand dollars. What, firstly, how much
Speaker 1: is this guy charging to send a letter that is
Speaker 1: not I know how much a legal letter cost and
Speaker 1: it ain't ten thousand dollars. And the club completely followed
Speaker 1: as well, and the cops that we will actually give
Speaker 1: you the five hundred dollars.
Speaker 4: What's the actual case?
Speaker 3: This guy was just going to have a comedy show
Speaker 3: that involves the fact that this woman can't break dance.
Speaker 1: That's right, and it it just doesn't seem to make
Speaker 1: any sense. They keep saying. She's saying, oh, it's not
Speaker 1: the kangaroo. It's not because it's an indigenous kangaroo, or
Speaker 1: it's not really to any indigenous camp. But she knows
Speaker 1: that indigenous people have been upset by that, and saying,
Speaker 1: how do you appropriate the kangaroo when we've got our
Speaker 1: own kangaroo downs, So she says she's very sorry about that.
Speaker 1: And then she's saying, oh, it's not because it's an
Speaker 1: infringement on copyright. So then what actual So what.
Speaker 5: Is it, you know, electual property?
Speaker 1: But that doesn't when they actually try to, when they
Speaker 1: try to sort of say that Sara intellctual property, it
Speaker 1: makes no sense. And there is actually no legal grounds
Speaker 1: as far as I'm aware, for actually doing.
Speaker 3: That, because the lawyer clearly disagrees.
Speaker 1: The lawyer's just the lawyers making it up. This is
Speaker 1: the thing. They're just bullying this tiny little club like
Speaker 1: you can you can take the piece out of a
Speaker 1: public figure you do not have. Someone can pretend to
Speaker 1: be Joe Hildebrand or whatever, and I can't say, hey,
Speaker 1: you're taking my intellectual property because that's my name and
Speaker 1: so and that's.
Speaker 9: So Australia because yep, sorry, no, it's so Australian to
Speaker 9: take the pierce or what we do. Absolutely, and she
Speaker 9: the you need to lean into this, have some fun
Speaker 9: with it, and said she sends this comedy club a
Speaker 9: legal letter for ten grand I think anyone that had
Speaker 9: any support for Reagun has completely again.
Speaker 3: I've seen him a very different inside of her funny
Speaker 3: lady at the Olympics and.
Speaker 1: Now it's like always thought there was subjects.
Speaker 4: I mean, give us a break.
Speaker 3: Theorst part about this is this poor comedy guy is
Speaker 3: now going to be buried in legal fees himself. Because
Speaker 3: you can't write your own letter and response to something
Speaker 3: like that, you need legal help as well. And so
Speaker 3: the sad saga unfolds to Virginia now where a bend
Speaker 3: of teachers who had been mandated by their school you
Speaker 3: must use any student's preferred pronouns has taken the case
Speaker 3: to court.
Speaker 4: And one good on you guys. More teachers need to
Speaker 4: be doing this kind of thing.
Speaker 3: They're in Harrisburg City Public schools and they just said
Speaker 3: to themselves, look, we're not taking this. I love that
Speaker 3: they actually bother to take it to court.
Speaker 4: And what do you know, such a mandate is not legal.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but also there is not a teacher alive, I
Speaker 1: reckon that would deliberately upset or offend one of their students.
Speaker 1: That's right. So if there was, for example, an actual
Speaker 1: student who seriously and I know some some kids who
Speaker 1: seriously you know, identified as someone of the opposite tenor
Speaker 1: or whatever, or wanted to go by a different name
Speaker 1: or different pronoun I have no doubt that meeting with
Speaker 1: the school it would be help help you dealt with
Speaker 1: really really sensitively, really really seriously, and that student would
Speaker 1: be addressed how they'd want to be addressed. The problem
Speaker 1: with the mandate is, I reckon you would instantly, and
Speaker 1: I know this because this is what I do. Instantly,
Speaker 1: every single kid would say they were gender fluid. They'd say, Joseph,
Speaker 1: what is the answer to question? So I'm sorry, miss,
Speaker 1: I'm gender fluid. It's Joseph today, and then say, oh,
Speaker 1: and that is what so many people.
Speaker 5: It's an opportunity for students.
Speaker 1: To just that's right, and you don't.
Speaker 5: Don't.
Speaker 1: The last thing you want to do in any school
Speaker 1: environment is put more power into the student's hands, but
Speaker 1: it's to you don't want to undermine the teacher's authority, of.
Speaker 5: Course, but it's just ridiculous. Why is this woke nonsense
Speaker 5: being pushed on them.
Speaker 9: You've got to, you know, say what your preferred name
Speaker 9: is and your preferred pronouns, stick to the gender you've
Speaker 9: actually It also just takes away from then people that
Speaker 9: are properly struggling with their gender. If then all of
Speaker 9: a sudden, twelve year olds have to save us. Maybe
Speaker 9: I'm a they, maybe I want to be.
Speaker 5: A heed today. It's it's absolutely ridiculous. Good on the
Speaker 5: teachers for fighting this one.
Speaker 1: Yes, that's it.
Speaker 4: And Gabby Kiss Starmer's Dolementarum in trouble.
Speaker 9: You know, the latest ipsoce poll that I found on
Speaker 9: Kiss Starmer found that he was more unpopular than any
Speaker 9: other PM in these five months that he's been leading
Speaker 9: for forty years. And I can understand why he's been
Speaker 9: urged to scrap this careless, careless rather guidance on single
Speaker 9: sex spaces. According to this document on what's sex spaces are,
Speaker 9: it's lawful to operate a single sex service on a
Speaker 9: mixed sex basis determined by self ID. So that completely
Speaker 9: takes your fe feeds the purpose of single sex spaces.
Speaker 9: If Kirstarma really cared about safe spaces for men for well, yeah,
Speaker 9: sure for men and also for mostly for women because
Speaker 9: they're more likely to be targeted, yeah, absolutely more vulnerable
Speaker 9: in this, he wouldn't need to include that that it's
Speaker 9: determined by self ID, that all of a sudden you
Speaker 9: can decide to be whatever you want and you can
Speaker 9: go into each space.
Speaker 1: He should look to my example because my yeah, my life.
Speaker 1: Well it's amazing what we've done at home. But at
Speaker 1: my house, my wife has actually established a no sex space.
Speaker 5: Right, how's that going through?
Speaker 1: Yeah?
Speaker 3: And on that note, I think it's a good time
Speaker 3: to go to a break stick around. And when we're back,
Speaker 3: Santa Con is taking America by store.
Speaker 4: Well, you can rest.
Speaker 3: Easier tonight because the climate crisis.
Speaker 4: Is sold as a giant cargo ship has been retrofitted
Speaker 4: with sales.
Speaker 1: Joe, that's correct, Liz. As you know, I'm a great
Speaker 1: student of history, and I thought that I'd missed the
Speaker 1: great Golden age of sale, but apparently it's coming back.
Speaker 1: It's fantastic steam that was just a passing fad dieselna
Speaker 1: who needs it? This is the Soha Max. It is
Speaker 1: a cargo ship with four hundred thousand ton capacity and
Speaker 1: it has just had five thirty five meter high Rota
Speaker 1: sales retrofitted to it. Look at it.
Speaker 4: Ridiculous, ridiculous.
Speaker 1: Tigned shipyard in China expected to be able to cut
Speaker 1: the vessel's fuel consumption by as much as way for it,
Speaker 1: I think all great was worth it. Wow that christ
Speaker 1: is so pro emissions by three thousand tons a year.
Speaker 1: The only catches it's carrying iron ore. So we have
Speaker 1: a tle oil tape.
Speaker 3: Of course, it had to do this in order to
Speaker 3: just wait, it's guilty conscience. Well you've probably heard of
Speaker 3: Tom McDonald. He is a strong conservative rapper in the
Speaker 3: United States of America, and he's put together a little
Speaker 3: jingle of his own for the festive season. Well, the
Speaker 3: tide is finely turning and Cammar's speech is slurring.
Speaker 1: Thank God for saying bye to Joel, screw the woke,
Speaker 1: screw the woke, screw the world.
Speaker 3: Now that he is a Christmas Carol, I think we
Speaker 3: can all get the.
Speaker 5: High a lot of sense. Look, Christmas spirit.
Speaker 9: Everyone's feeling it the moment, particularly in the streets of
Speaker 9: New York City.
Speaker 5: Where people are taking part in Santa Cohn. Take a
Speaker 5: look at this.
Speaker 11: I love to dress up, and I love the holiday season,
Speaker 11: and I just I love getting into a whole vibe
Speaker 11: of the holiday and seeing everyone else dressed up. That's
Speaker 11: what I pretty much do for a living. I mean,
Speaker 11: and a hobby. It's a hobby. I cars play anyways,
Speaker 11: So it's it's just it's so much fun to see
Speaker 11: everybody in the festive mood.
Speaker 9: Thousands of people are dressing up as Santa, taking to
Speaker 9: the streets, doing a pub crawl and getting into the
Speaker 9: Christmas spirit.
Speaker 5: Look, I don't think it's something that I would take
Speaker 5: part in.
Speaker 4: I'm so American. I like someone tried this in Australia.
Speaker 4: Everyone would be like, yeah, na, mate, well she'll be right,
Speaker 4: she'll be right. I love that. There's a few grenches
Speaker 4: in the mix as well, a.
Speaker 1: Few But even that lovely lady there, I sort of
Speaker 1: didn't say, is that Christians? She looked like a member
Speaker 1: of the suicide squad. She loved.
Speaker 4: Who's the woman in the suicide squad? You're just picking
Speaker 4: on her hand?
Speaker 1: Yeah, well just you know, I just I'm not saying
Speaker 1: it wasn't nice, but Harlequin.
Speaker 4: She's insane. Harlequin's insane.
Speaker 3: What are you saying about this beautiful woman in America
Speaker 3: just trying to celebrate Christmas.
Speaker 1: Job probably has a few issues.
Speaker 4: Of harashtag discrimination.
Speaker 5: Adelaide to Vancouver, they're all taking part in it.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, it is absolutely massive. That's a wrap from
Speaker 3: us tonight. We'll see you tomorrow. Coming up next, Sky
Speaker 3: News documentary The Australian Sixty Years of news,